More Tolling of the Bell Curve
Some may recall my MND article entitled The Tolling of the Bell Curve in which I sought to introduce readers to the variety of topics covered in Rich Doyle’s book Save the Males. The article dealt with the implications of the significantly greater variance of mental traits of men compared with women. The science is not new and a generally accepted fact. Review of the comments indicates that the section of the book fails to clearly convey the desired concepts.
To clarify, the Normal distribution, or Bell Curve, is the limiting distribution of a random quantity which is the sum of smaller, independent random phenomena. A person’s mental traits satisfy the definition as they are the sum of many small random variations in genetic and environmental factors. The shape of the curve is a probability distribution centered on the mean or average and the width determined by the variability or deviation from the mean.
It seems appropriate that I add a few words not only to this audience, but in the next revision of Save the Males. I have recommended the following be added to Save the Males:
“The observed differences in the variability of traits between the sexes can be explained genetically. Many brain-related genes are located on the X chromosome, of which women have two copies and men only one. A mutation in one of these genes, whether positive or negative, will thus have a higher impact in males than in females (where the second, presumably non-mutated copy will mitigate the effect of the mutated one).”
It is important to note that this difference in variability between the sexes is of genetic origin and not environmental, and no amount of politically correct thinking can change the fact that there are significantly more very smart and very dumb men than women. It is sheer folly or wishful thinking to suggest that the smartest men can be replaced by equally smart women by any form of affirmative action. Replacing America’s smartest men with fifty percent women will simply result in more bad decisions and less progress.
As Save the Males includes my “artwork” shown below, it is appropriate to clarify that it is just that, artwork, and not the graphing of actual research data. It is intended only to illustrate the general concept common to numerous mental traits from IQ to moral character. The variability difference I graphically depicted is about two, but plots developed from actual data shown on a well referenced Wikipedia page entitled Sex and Intelligence indicate the difference of variance to be five making my artwork very conservative and under representing the actual differences in number at the deviation extremes.
The radical feminists have one thing factually correct: There are far more “deviant” men than women. Perhaps they should consider the “good” as well as the “bad and ugly” male deviants.
Nothing was intended to suggest that the horizontal axis labels are applicable to the same individuals, but rather as mental traits that follow a Normal or Gaussian distribution. No one is suggesting that there are not highly immoral individuals with high IQs or highly moral individuals with minimal IQs. The horizontal axis is actually plotting variability from the mean or average in spite of the labels.
The objective is simply to explain the common observation that more men are both smarter and dumber than women. Nothing herein suggest that that men are smarter than women on average, but only that when looking for the great minds capable of solving societies greatest problems, prudent recruitment would greatly favor men.
It is notable how politically incorrect it is to even suggest that there are more very smart men than women. Even at Harvard a rational and factual statement can cost one his job and promote a totally irrational response. From Wikipedia page entitled Sex and Intelligence I quote:
“In January 2005, Lawrence Summers, president of Harvard University, unintentionally provoked a public controversy when MIT biologist Nancy Hopkins leaked comments he made at a closed economics conference at the National Bureau of Economic Research. In analyzing the disproportionate numbers of men over women in high-end science and engineering jobs, he suggested that, after the conflict between employers’ demands for high time commitments and women’s disproportionate role in the raising of children, the next most important factor might be the above-mentioned greater variance in intelligence among men than women, and that this difference in variance might be intrinsic, adding that he “would like nothing better than to be proved wrong”. The controversy generated a great deal of media attention, forced Summers to make a number of apologies, and led Harvard to commit $50 million to the recruitment and hiring of women faculty.”
Fifty million sounds about right to recruit a coupe of women faculty with equivalent IQ’s and experience to best male faculty. It makes perfect sense to reject thousands of well qualified men to find a woman that is equally competent simply to be politically correct.
“You have to be an intellectual to believe such nonsense. No ordinary man could be such a fool.” – George Orwell
For a little humor and more information one must review the Pinker vs. Spelke Debate entitled The Science of Gender and Science. (That’s really the title. Using the word “science” twice makes it doubly scientific.) We have Harvard psychology professor Steven Pinker, an admitted feminist paying homage to Gloria Steinem, with hair that would make his female opponent jealous arguing for the men and Harvard psychology professor Elizabeth Spelke, Co-Director of the Mind, Brain, and Behavior Initiative of Harvard arguing for the women.
Possibly related posts...
63 year old retird electronic engineer/chemist 20 years as Men's/Father's Rights Activist | More from Lloyd Selberg
Stumble It!
Oh no. You’re talking numbers to an innumerate culture. Ungood. Plus ungood. Double-plus ungood. I’ve tried to warn these fools, if we allow mathematical correctness to strangle inoffensiveness we might end up repealing the 19th!